In the midst of World War 2, Lady Sarah Ashley (Nicole Kidman) an English aristocrat, travels to their cattle farm in Australia, Faraway Downs, to convince her husband to sell the property and return home. However, her husband gets murdered and she discovers that their farm manager Neil Fletcher (David Wenham) is stealing her cattle to sell to King Carney in order to gain cattle monopoly in the Northern Territory. She employs the services of “Drover” (Hugh Jackman) a freelance white cowboy, Nullah (Brandon Walters), an 11-year old half breed aboriginal and four others to drive her 1,500 cattle to Darwin and steal the sales from Carney. And the more Carney and Fletcher attempt to thwart their plans, the more determined Lady Sarah becomes. Two years after they successfully sell their cattle, Lady Sarah, Drover and Nullah live happily together in Faraway Downs. But shortly Nullah is captured and sent off to the Missions, Drover walks out on Sarah after an argument, and Fletcher returns as the owner of Carney cattle farm, determined to take over Faraway Downs. When the Japanese attack Darwin , the three desperately hold on to the hope that they will be able to rescue and reunite their family.

The movie is a love story set in the background of World War II, racism and the heartbreaking reality of the Stolen Generation. Each scene is a cinematic masterpiece showcasing the charm of Australia and the 40s with another brilliant performance from Kidman. The multilayer storytelling is heightened by the great chemistry of Kidman and Jackman and some memorable scoring. Without doubt, Australia as a movie is good…good but not great. The story is too Mills and Boon type presented an hour longer than necessary. The war time drama and romance were a little too clichéic and over-the-top overshadowing Luhrmann’s attempt to present the story of the “stolen generation” as the heart of the movie. There is something missing from the production to make it an unforgettable film.

There are several good and honest presentations of friendship, equality, hope and courage. Australia is more than the love story between Lady Sarah and Drover; it is also about the love that blossomed between Sarah and Nullah—a mother loving a child, a well-to-do’s compassion for the unfortunate, and a woman’s concern for another human being. Parents should guide their young children since there is a slight scattering of profanity, an implied sex scene and scenes of violence, racism and murder

Book-lover, collector and bookbinder of old and rare books Mortimer “Mo” Folcher (Brendan Fraser) is in search of the book “Inkheart”, dragging his 12-year-old daughter Maggie (Eliza Hope Bennett) along in his search but not revealing to her the reason for it. They finally find in a book market in Switzerland. At once, a mysterious character (Paul Bettany) appears who would follow them around pleading for something only Mo understands. The truth that is being kept from Maggie is that her father Mo is a so-called “silver tongue”—a person with a gift of bringing to life characters in a book simply by reading the book aloud. Mo, in fact, has not read aloud for nine years now. The last time he read aloud a bedtime story for Maggie, then a 3-year-old, the flame juggler Dustfinger and the villain Capricorn (Andy Serkis) sprang out of the pages of the book and became flesh-and-blood characters. But the down side of Mo’s gift is, there’s a trade-off: for every fictional character his reading aloud brings to life, a real-life person must take its place in the book’s pages. That fateful night, it was Maggie’s mother, Mo’s wife Resa (Sienna Guillory), who vanished, virtually sucked into the book. The mysterious character following father and daughter now is Dustfinger who wants Mo to read him back into the book to continue his fictional existence. Mo, however, says he would only do that if his missing wife Resa could return from the book to real life with him ang Maggie. There begins the adventure.

The book which Inkheart the movie is based on is German writer Cornelia Funke’s international bestseller for young adults, the first volume of the trilogy begun in 2004 and finished in 2008. For 70 weeks it was in The New York Times’ best-seller list. Many viewers and reviewers would compare Inkheart with Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings but the comparison would be groundless. Inkheart has its own universe which is neither too otherworldly nor too down to earth. The CGI, special effects, and eye-popping images from familiar fairy tales do not overwhelm the viewer but are just right to advance the story. On the other hand, the Italian landscape is not a manufactured movie set, and the sprawling castle on the mountaintop would not be out of place in the European setting. Prepare for action from beginning to end, and enjoy the acting which is very good, too, evoking the viewer’s sympathy for the characters.

Inkheart will be enjoyed by all ages, and each will understand its message in his/her own level. It’s fascinating enough to pull youngsters away from shallow pleasures (texting and television) and attract them into reading. Adolescents and adults alike will find warmth in the strong family-oriented message Inkheart delivers. Appreciate what the characters would go through in order to be with their families: Mo and Maggie encountering monsters, a cyclone, a unicorn, flying monkeys, armed men and a dark, smoky, billowing, fire-breathing thing called “The Shadow” in search of the missing wife and mother Resa; Dustfinger hounding Mo and Maggie to be returned to his family in the book, fully knowing that he will die in the story’s end. While the face of Inkheart is fantasy and adventure, its heart is a story of love, friendship, devotion and perseverance. Inkheart subtly teaches that giving is better than receiving, that friendship must be honored and treasured, that selfishness is not good, that it is right to sacrifice for loved ones, that we can achieve anything if we believe in it and persevere. These are lessons not only found in the pages of the book “Inkheart” but also in the pages of “The Book”, the Bible. It’s wholesome enough for General Patronage—there is no foul language, sex or blood despite the violence—but parents must explain certain scary visuals to very young children.

After 40 years, Marie Milla Jones (Anastasia Hille), an accomplished film director in Los Angeles, comes back to her birthplace and roots in Russia upon learning that she is an heir to a property left by her parents whom she barely knows. She was contacted and traced by notary Andrei Misharin (Valentin Ganev) and since she hardly knows her past, she agrees to meet with him. After much briefing of her history, particularly that of her mother, she is then directed to see the property that happens to be an old house in the middle of nowhere. Accompanied by a truck driver who eventually disappears, Milla arrives at night and finds herself in a creepy, eerie place. She enters the old house which has been abandoned for 40 years and finds out she is not alone. A man named Nicolai (Karel Roden), who introduces himself to her as her twin brother whom she never met, is also there for the same reason. As they both try to uncover the mysteries of the past, they are both haunted by their future – death.

The film is true to its genre – eerie, creepy, dark and full of mysteries. The plot is not really new but the treatment is fresh. Haunted house movies may be passe but given proper direction, they can still pass as a thrilling experience. The production design and sound engineering should be commended for a good job. The entire film is not at all scary and the shock factor is very minimal but the simple narrative is rich in layers that keep the audience awake from beginning to end. Not all mysteries are resolved though, and in fact, it leaves many loose ends. But that could, after all, be intentional: to make the audience as lost as the characters in the movie. Such motive has been effective for the audience is left with many questions to ponder.

Is the past really worth digging up? Characters in the movie as well as the audience are posed this dilemma. The past gives one a sense of his or her roots and foundation. But then, if one is kept haunted by the ghost of the unknown, it may eventually lead to destruction. As said in the movie, “sometimes it's better to let things remain as they are.” The main character in the movie could have chosen to focus on her present, her daughter, but she opted to center her energy on her past. Perhaps she wants to fill in a void in her heart or to uncover the truth behind her parents' death. For whatever reason, she could have sought proper guidance. As in other haunted house features, the ghosts are more powerful than humans. Such may bring confusing signals and even sleepless nights. But looking at the context of maternal love, The Abandoned succeeds in illustrating how far a mother's love for her children could go. And it goes beyond death. However, some scenes of violence, gore, nudity and profanity may not be suitable for the young audiences.

Two years after breaking up with his girlfriend, Carl Allen (Jim Carrey) is still in the throes of a depression which makes him indifferent to everything, including overtures from his friends to join them again. Working as a loans officer at a bank, he has become the ultimate naysayer so that he rejects all loan applications as well as invitations of his boss who is eager to make friends. But one day, he attends a self-help “Say Yes” seminar. The charismatic speaker and yes guru persuades him to change his attitude, make a “covenant” with himself and seize all opportunities to say “yes” to all requests. Allen is now convinced that not saying “yes” will have dire consequences. As a result of this brainwashing, Allen says yes to all invitations and experiences results, some pleasant (like learning to play the guitar and to fly a plane) and some untoward ones like accommodating a tramp’s request to be brought to a leisure park in the dead of night and finds himself stranded with no cell phone nor gasoline and loses money too. On this night he meets Allison (Zooey Deschanel), a beautiful free spirit, engaged in activities that seem unusual to him. Attracted to her, Allen joyfully says “yes” to her invitations, joins her in many “yescapades” and forges a relationship with her. Bu Allison soon doubts Allen’s feelings for her when she learns that he says yes without really wanting to. Will Allen and Allison get to reconcile? Will Allen continue to be a “yes” man?

Yes Man gets most of its odd ideas from a memoir written by Danny Wallace. In addition, most viewers of a 1997 film Liar Liar (which also stars Jim Carrey) think that Yes Man is like a similar parallel story in reverse for in the previous film, Carrey habitually lies and is forced by circumstances to tell the truth for 24 hours. The present film’s concept of saying yes all the time is probably intended to lead to a series of funny incidents but these are only sporadically humorous. Some attempts at humor seem forced and even downright vulgar. Like the encounter of Carl with his sex-crazed elderly neighbor. This crude sexual joke is not explicitly shown but it leaves a bad taste in the mouth, just the same. That bar brawl with a drunk Carl is perhaps intended to be funny but it is grim_. This slapstick comedy features the usual elastic facial contortions and queer physical humor associated with the clownish Jim Carrey. He carries the film through but the humor here seems stale and lacks freshness.

Yes Man shows how indiscriminately saying either “yes” or “no” can have negative effects in a person’s life. In the early part of the movie, Carl’s saying “no” to all requests and invitations from friends even if they are sensible and well-meaning deepens his depression and makes him a recluse, devoid of all involvements with others. We all need some interaction with people to function well and to live a normal happy life. On the other hand, saying “yes” always without much thought can be just as disastrous, though hilarious at times as some situations in the movie shows. Nobody would take us up on our word if we say everything lightly like what happened when Allison doubted Carl’s love. That would have been another crisis in Carl’s life. We should mean what we say and mean it from the heart.

During the time of hurricane Katrina in 2005, an 80-year-old woman (Cate Blanchett), on her death bed in New Orleans, asks her daughter Caroline (Julia Ormond), to read from the diary of one Benjamin Button (Brad Pitt). From reading it, Caroline learns that her dying mother is the Daisy in the diary. In 1918, Benjamin Button’s mother dies giving birth to him, the infant who looks like a shriveled old man. Benjamin’s father Thomas Button (Jason Flemyng)—taking the child for a monster due to his hideous appearance and blaming him for the death of his mother—leaves the infant at the steps of a nursing home for the aged. Its kindhearted manager, Queenie (Taraji Henson), keeps and raises the foundling despite his monstrous looks. By the time Benjamin is seven years old, he looks like younger but still decrepit 80-year old who moves around in a wheelchair. Nobody takes him seriously when he says he is aged seven, because they do not know that Benjamin is physically aging backward. At age 13, Benjamin meets Daisy who regularly visits a relative in the home, and the girl is to be unforgettable for him.

Director David Fincher reportedly waited to do the film until the technology could enable one actor to play the role in the film’s entirety. This is it—technological magic at its amazing best. All throughout the movie you could be asking, “Is that Brad Pitt?” Blanchett’s makeup as Daisy on her death bed is so natural that you wonder if it’s a different actress; indeed, Blanchett seeing her aging image could well prepare for her golden years. But Blanchett’s makeup is nothing compared to what cinematic technology did on Pitt’s character. They superimposed Pitt’s face and eyes into the Benjamin Button character—except, of course, when Button reached Pitt’s age, as Button is pure Brad Pitt circa 2008. The acting is Oscar material, and the cast couldn’t have been better chosen, with Taraji Henson, Tilda Swinton, Jared Harris and Jason Flemyng delivering supporting roles. Helping the viewer accept the improbable plot is the movie’s attention to period details. Sets for the 1920 vignettes are perfectly reconstructed and special effects are used to enhance the flow of the story.

Inspired by a short story written in 1922 by F. Scott Fitzgerald with the same title, the movie The Curious Case of Benjamin Button should be viewed as science fiction but pondered as drama on life, time and aging. Viewers shouldn’t bicker about the story’s logic or the lack of it, the incongruousness of the idea of aging backwards, but rather take it as a fairy-tale that can lead us to empathize with the characters and then go deeper into ourselves. Could we believe we could sire a child who looks like a reincarnation of Rosemary’s Baby? Would we care to nurture as our own a repulsive-looking newborn abandoned at our doorsteps? Would we bother to play with a teenager who looks more like our great grandfather? Would we employ in our tugboat a senior citizen who’d be better off resting in a home for the aged? Even if we were a prostitute, could we stand having for a customer a 75-year old virgin? Would our love be strong enough to want to marry a lover knowing he’d look 16 when we are 64? And wouldn’t we feel ancient bottle-feeding an infant who used to be our lover? A story of reverse aging may be a difficult premise to accept but the movie must be viewed on its own terms and for the richness it offers to thinking viewers; otherwise, it would be seen as just a whole lot of nonsense.

Emma (Anne Hathaway) and Liv (Kate Hudson) are best friends who grew up with one dream: to get married at the Plaza Hotel with each other as bridesmaids. When they both get proposed to, they excitedly plan the details of their big day and book two separate dates in June at the Plaza. Their friendship is enhanced as they try to support each other’s dreams and give way to make the other happy. Unfortunately, a clerical error books their wedding on the same day at the same time and the next available date is three years from now. The perfect seemingly unbreakable bond is broken as each refuses to change her wedding date or venue and resort to sabotaging each other’s ceremony.

On the one hand, the story is shallow and cute. Although it does not try to develop deeper characterization, it successfully gives the personality of the two protagonists and develops the plot in broad strokes. There is not much to expect from the movie with a mediocre acting, save for Bergen, a predictable storyline and a not so funny comedy. On the other hand, there are some charming classic moments as well as dull forgettable scenes. It might be a run-of the mill romantic comedy but it does manage to brighten a few minutes of the day afterwards.

Real and time-tested friendship is a better love story than romance and fairy-tale weddings. No matter how much strain life and time puts on friends, that one person you cared about and shared your life with will always be loyal, true and supportive. Unfortunately, this little message may get drowned by the ridiculous obsession the protagonist displays over having the perfect dream wedding as if that single event will spell out how the marriage will turn out. Of course, every bride (and maybe groom) wishes and needs to have that unforgettably romantic moment when they say “I do” and celebrate their union with the world. But at the end of the day, no matter how grand or beautiful one’s wedding is, what will count is one’s maturity, love and desire to make the relationship work.

The movie is mild and decent but there are some offensive scenes and situations that will not suit the young audience. For instance, alcohol is constantly used to relieve stress, mild nudity during the bachelorette party, and the fact that the two would be brides are already living in with their respective boyfriends.

By circumstance, the mission to transport a "package" falls in the hands of Frank Martin (Jason Statham) under a life threatening rule that monitors the accomplishment of the mission. To Frank’s surprise, the "package” is Valentina (Natalya Rudakova,), the kidnapped daughter of Ukraine's Minister for Environmental Protection who is being blackmailed by a syndicate to allow the shipment of toxic materials to the country. The rule includes a metal wristband put on them that is programmed to blow up if they step away from the designated car. Everytime Frank makes his turn away from the programmed route by rule, he always meets a challenge to fight for his life. All these challenges, however, are amazingly hurdled by Frank whose fighting and driving skills win the admiration of Valentina and make her feel safer than her previous transporters. Will they survive the rule? Will the bad elements succeed in bringing pollutants into Ukraine?

Transporter 3 is a spectular film that keeps the interest of the viewers until the end. While the story is somewhat slow in the beginning, it makes sense in its progress towards conclusion. There are actually fewer lines delivered and for the most part the story is carried out in action and special effects. Acting-wise, Jason is effective in his role as Frank Martin while the rest could have done more. Nevertheless, the director succeeds in complimenting some mediocre acting by putting more efforts in other technical aspects of the film particularly in cinematography, sounds scoring and lighting. Overall, despite some lapses in editing--like villain Robert Knepper seems to be everywhere and fighting scenes that do not even leave small bruises on Frank--the film is technically commendable.

Life is precious and should be protected. The environment as people's habitat also needs to be protected to ensure a better and safer world for future generations. Essentially, this is what the film tries to convey: Anyone who could be a threat to human life and the environment should be cautioned or will have no place in this world. At the same time, a person in his right mind cannot just be a blind follower of a foolish rule that puts precious life in danger. The film also shows that a government position cannot be compromised for any immoral act. However, despite this major message, the film shows brutal killings so younger viewers must be guided.

Denny Colt (Gabriel Macht) is a slain policeman who mysteriously resurrects as The Spirit hero with super powers to fight crimes and work with local police commissioner Dolan (Dan Lauria). He is constantly being helped by Dolan's physician daughter, Ellen (Sara Paulson) whenever he gets wounded in a fight although he recovers unusually fast. The Spirit's ultimate enemy is a drug lord named Octopus (Samuel Jackson). As The Spirit attempts to destroy the equally immortal Octopus, Denny's childhood sweetheart Sand Saref (Eva Mendez)--from whom he parted after a bitter quarrel--comes back to town and enters the picture as a seductive jewel thief.

Based on a graphic novel by Will Eisner, the movie passes off artistically as far as visuals are concerned. The stylized violence surely appeals to the fanatics of the genre. But for a regular film audience who looks for story substance, The Spirit utterly fails to convey neither a substantial plot nor a compelling narrative. The plot, although apparently inconsequential, fails to develop its characters who all eventually appear as emotionless and indifferent. Even the The Spirit's enemy, Octopus, does not create an impact, given his melodramatic flamboyance. Ultimately, The Spirit is just a graphic spectacle with a usual superhero non-narrative with a twist of few wits and satirical anecdotes. It does not go beyond that and to look for substance might be a bit too much expectation.

Unlike other superhero movies, The Spirit is devoid of apparent moral of story. Apart from the given that hero protects the neighborhood at night, his character is far from ideal – a womanizer who treats women as mere objects of desire. There is senseless violence all over the place where two immortals try to outdo and kill each other knowing the fact that they both can get away with it. This might even send a confusing message to the audience: one's immortality can make one get away with murder. It may be true that sometimes vigilantism is the only way to fight evil but still, violence only leads to further violence. In any case, violence is no solution after all. There are also some scenes of nudity and a certain degree of profanity in the movie which may not be appropriate for viewers below 14 years old.

Skeeter Bronson (Adam Sandler), a hotel handyman grew up in a homey hotel owned by his father (Jonathan Pryce). Later, it was bought by a hotel magnate Nottingham (Richard Griffiths) on which site, a grander bigger hotel was built and in which Skeeter is now employed. At night, Skeeter babysits the 2 kids of his sister Wendy (Courtney Cox), who’s looking for a job in Arizona. Since the 2 charges wish to hear bedtime stories, Skeeter concocts fantastic tales. With the kids cooperative inputs, theses stories have a strange way of becoming true to life. In other hours, the kids are with Jill (Keri Russell), a teacher who runs an ecology friendly school due for demolition as the hotel tycoon plans to build another hotel on its site. Skeeter does not see eye to eye with the hotel’s manager Kendall (Guy Pearce) because both men are interested in Nottingham’s daughter (Teresa Palmer). Skeeter always seems to be a loser but he realizes that by slanting the bedtime fantasies he invents, he can make things happens in his favor. Can his dream of becoming a hotel manager come true? Can he win the heart of Nottingham’s daughter? Can he help Jill save her school?

Bedtime Stories is said to be a “harmless” comedy fit for family entertainment as it can appeal to everyone of any age. Though the subject matter is not the usual children’s fare, the kids will likely be entertained by the fantasy. But it is doubtful that most adults will much enjoy this picture that is predominantly silly and inane. Still, there are some parts that are laughable like when Skeeter’s tongue is bitten by a bee and he can only make incomprehensible sounds so his friend had to “translate” his words during a crucial “presentation”. The production design is lavish as every invented tale is interpreted or presented with impressive visuals and technical effects. There is variety in the imaginative concoctions which include, among others, a cowboy with a bright red horse, a zero-gravity battle in outer space, a gladiator in a chariot and of course, a medieval king. There are several layers to the film. The beginning and end are narrated by Skeeter’s father and within the story that he narrates about his son, the protagonist Skeeter narrates the fantasies that are now “smaller” stories within the “bigger story. So there is an alternation of fantasy and reality. Adam Sandler is his usual funny self and does adequate work here.

In Bedtime Stories, Skeeter is portrayed most of the time as a loser so that he resorts to fantasizing to make things happen for his benefit. But the movie ends positively and hopefully in that it shows that a person may lose most of the time, but by doing something right (not by imagining out-of-this-world schemes), he will eventually succeed. Sketter’s sister objected to Skeeter’s telling the children nothing ends happily in real life. She does not want her children to develop such unhealthy pessimism and think that beautiful happy things happen only in fairytales or such. One reason she says she wants her kids to be with Skeeter is so they can “catch” some of Skeeter’s usual light happy outlook. Skeeter’s story proves his sister right. Things can also end well in real life.

Eleven-year old, not yet in his teens, Bubuy (Nash Aguas) is the favorite target of the three teenage boys who find it fun in bullying him. He tries to avoid them, but they manage to get to him. This time they catch him and order that he build a fire for them. He does so but suddenly the flames grow and spread, making the living forest trees to go after the boy for having caused the fire and heat to intensify, putting their territory, the forest and life in peril. Bubuy manages to escape and get home safe. The empty house however, makes him feel that his grandparents (Nova Villa and Noel Trinidad) are gone missing, he does not know where they are. Some time after, he is surprised to spot a young, lively and smiling girl looking in at him from an open window. She is Anna (Katrina “Hopia” Legaspi) offering to help him find his “Lolo’ and “Lola” who had been kidnapped- according to her- for the scare he gave the forest dwellers. Anna says they have been taken to the land of Elementalia. She shows Bubuy that she is a “Manananggal”, a creature that could separate her upper body from the lower portion when needed. With his eager consent, in a sweep she has him held securely in her hands and flying on their way to his grandparents.

They enter into what for him is a strange place inhabited by enchanted creatures. On their arrival the first thing Anna does is to bring Bubuy to the kind and helpful Lolo Nano (Peque Gallaga) who could tell them what to do, and also concoct a potion that could free the grandparents from their captors. Right away, Anna and Bubuy set to work. Joining them is Narsi (Michael V.), a vain, funny but helpful “Tikbalang”- a half human and half horse creature- who volunteered taking them to the places they have to go.

Dayo is a well laid out story that will interest and entertain not only young viewers, but also the adults. That it is a locally produced film about our own stories of fantasy and mystery could serve as an added reason for potential viewers to watch it. This has also been endorsed by DepEd (the Department of Education) which could lead to elders and parents accompany their young children to see a worthwhile and pleasing Filipino cartoon feature.

Instead of the usual presentation of Philippine folklore and fantasy characters and creatures as frightening, evil, revengeful and the like. Dayo has shown them to be, except for the rare few, naturally normal beings, friendly, ready to help and among others deeds, to go a long way for someone even a stranger like Bubuy and his grandparents. Another plus for this movie fantasy story is that the Filipino artists could come up with cartoons, GCIs and handle Digitals almost as well as their American counterpart.

Though still quite young, timid and reserved, Bubuy is shown as a kid, when confronted with the loss of his grandparents, being alone, hurt by bullies and not knowing what to do; but when given the opportunity to become appositive person, with the help of Anna, he quickly grows up. In place of helplessness, fear, a feeling of loss, he and his world turn positive. His grandparents are back with him and Bubuy is no longer the child, he has grown. He is shown as a prayerful boy.

Television reporter Angela Vidal (Jennifer Carpenter) and her camareman (Steve Harris) are assigned to do a story about Los Angeles firefighters. As they are doing a video documentary, they are to spend one night shift with the firemen on duty covering all aspects of their job which include paramedics and responding to almost any kind of emergency. On that night, the fire company receives a call for an emergency at an apartment building. Angela and her cameraman follow the firemen routine. When they get there, they end up as witness to a horrifying disease that has infected most of the apartment building's residents. To their surprise, the entire building will be put on quarantine upon the order of the local government. They will all be trapped inside and as they find their way out, they discover an even more shocking truth: the infected people have gone totally insane and they attack and kill the living.

A remake of the Spanish thriller [REC] as in record, Quarantine is fresh shocker that tells the entire story on the point-of-view of an actual viewfinder of a camera from start to finish. This idea is not entirely new for those who have seen The Blair Witch Project which uses the same approach. The shaky camera shot and seem inadequate lighting are all part of the film's style. This has made the audience believe they really are watching an actual documentary of a real event making the shock and thrill seem very real. The actors are effective and Carpenter is convincing as the reporter documenting an actual horror experience. But then, at the end of the movie, the audience are left with nothing to ponder on because the entire film lacks depth and it does not go beyond its shocking value.

How far should a news reporter go to cover an interesting story? Is it moral to sacrifice innocent lives for the sake of preventing the spread of a pandemic? These are some of the questions worth asking while watching the film. The mass media itself loves sensationalized stories and the darker and riskier the story is, the more premium for the reporter. With this kind of mindset, the mass media persons end up to be go getters of any opportunity to which they sometimes end up as sacrificial lambs. This is the fate of Angela in the movie. But then, her character exemplifies loyalty to one's job and this can be a good point. However, limits should be set so as not to jeopardize their lives in the line of duty. The audience's hearts go for the innocent victims of government's recklessness in implementing measures of preventing a pandemic from spreading. This is left for a much wider debate on bio-terrorism and quarantines. However, the right to life of a person, especially the innocent, should always be an utmost consideration. The gore, violence and emotional stress in the movie may cause nightmares and trauma for very young audiences so CINEMA deems the movie fit for mature viewers only.